BREAKING: Grand jury declines to indict Cleveland policemen in fatal shooting of 12-year-old Tamir R

a reply to: Phibes

Yes, when you point a gun at a cop that means automatic execution. Now that we've solved that last bit of common sense for you would you like us to tell you to not put your hand in fire, or touch electricity? Also, this 12 year old kid was 200lbs. Cops show up and a 200lb person is pointing a gun at them? Sorry, your life is over. But 12 years old automatically means he's precious, right? What age does gang activity start in Cleveland. Oh, not until 13?

a reply to: Phibes

Seriously? Have you been to Cleveland? Have to been to any city like Cleveland. It's a little different than Connecticut. There is no way in hell I would one second to find out if a gun is fake or not in Cleveland. I can't believe the absolutely stupidity people will actually reach for. Why don't you focus on facts instead of emotion bull****? Is it because you can't be bothered to do that reading? But at the same time your ignorance is completely justified because, hey, you're super special!

a reply to: Phibes

He didn't kill anyone because he got shot and the gun was fake. Wanna guess how many times the gun is fake in Cleveland? If there were not repercussion I would point a gun at your face just to see what you'd do. Would you ask me if it was real or not?

a reply to: Spider879

Two minor (read that as big) differences: nobody said he's pointing his rifle at people and it's a rifle. Rifles pretty much automatically beget standoff distance, whereas somebody reported to be pointing a handgun at people but doesn't currently appear to have the weapon in hand doesn't necessarily beget standoff distance.

But hey, all "man with a gun" calls are exactly the same, amirite?

a reply to: GamleGamle

Gamel, you are not overlooking anything; alot of most people know about 'policing' is only the bad things that happen on line, you tube and social media. Your point is very well worded.

I dont want to invite additional LEO haters to the thread.

I (as mentioned before) am a fan of less lethal, it is far from perfection right now; before retiring, I was armed with my duty weapon, (glock 22) back up weapon (glock 33) pepper spray (utilized almost 2-3 times per week) flexible baton, , Remington 870 Shotgun less & less lethal Remington 870 & finally a Bushmaster M4-A3 XM-15- ridicules right? Dependent on the situation depends on the weaponry -

IMOO, the more bad guys that get higher caliber and more deadly weapons, the more police forces have had to belly up and become even more armed...


Use of any technique comes with attendant risks, both for the public and for officers, and Tasers remain the subject of significant controversy. On April 4, 2015, Walter L. Scott was shot by a police officer after a routine traffic stop in North Charleston, S.C. The officer, Michael T. Slager, initially attempted to use a Taser, and when the device either failed or was improperly used, the officer fired eight shots from his pistol, killing Scott. Slager claimed that Scott had attempted to take his Taser, but this was not supported by a video of the incident. And two days earlier in Tulsa, Okla., Eric C. Harris was shot by a 73-year-old volunteer with the sheriff’s department; the volunteer, Robert C. Bates, said he wanted to use his Taser to subdue Harris during an arrest but accidentally pulled out his pistol. Harris died, and Bates was charged with homicid - See more at: journalistsresource.org...# sthash.DFr7mwZw.dpuf


A 2011 study by the U.S. Department of Justice’s National Institute of Justice, “Police Use of Force, Tasers and Other Less-Lethal Weapons,” examines the effectiveness and health outcomes of incidents involving CEDs (conducted energy devices), the most common of which is the Taser. The study looked at a range of police departments and specific incidents, and examined national survey data. The Taser, which is now used by some 15,000 law enforcement and military agencies across the United States, produces 50,000 volts of electricity and temporarily stuns and disables its target. But the electricity produced has also been associated with injury and even death.

The report’s findings include:

Injury rates vary widely when officers use force in general, ranging from 17% to 64% for citizens and 10% to 20% for officers.
Use of Tasers and other CEDs can reduce the statistical rate of injury to suspects and officers who might otherwise be involved in more direct, physical conflict. An analysis of 12 agencies and more than 24,000 use-of-force cases “showed the odds of suspect injury decreased by almost 60% when a CED was used.” This finding is not uniform across all agencies, however, and comes with a number of caveats.
A review of fatal Taser incidents found that many involved multiple uses of the device against the suspect in question. Therefore, “caution is urged in using multiple applications.” Because of increased vulnerability, caution should be exercised in using Tasers against “small children, those with diseased hearts, the elderly, those who are pregnant and other at-risk people.”
According to surveys of police departments, rules regarding Taser use vary widely. Six of every ten departments allow “for CED use against a subject who tenses and pulls when the officer tries to handcuff him or her.” In addition, only 31% ban CED use against clearly pregnant women, 25.9% against drivers of moving vehicles, 23.3% against handcuffed suspects, 23.2% against people in elevated areas and 10% against the elderly.

CEDs are “rapidly overtaking other force alternatives” among police departments and in some cases are being used at a rate that exceeds that of officers using “soft empty hand tactics,” or simple pushing or grappling with resistant suspects.
Overall, the growing use of CEDs is cause for concern: “Although the injury findings suggest that substituting CEDs for physical control tactics may be useful, their ease of use and popularity among officers raise the specter of overuse.”
- See more at: journalistsresource.org...# sthash.DFr7mwZw.dpuf

a reply to: ReadLeader

Why would there be an uproar? Video clearly shows he had a gun (fake or not) and was pointing it at people, and then had his hand on it when the cruiser pulled up...of course the officers weren't' indicted.

DON'T POINT A GUN AT PEOPLE AND WHEN A COP PULLS UP! PUT YOUR HANDS IN THE AIR!

edit to add a video:

Offsite Video

Now to be clear, even though I don't think the officers should be indicted, I DO think they handled this situation poorly. They thought they were blocking residences by pulling up like that, but in reality their car is too small to be a real shield if anything goes down. They should have pulled up at a safe distance and used their vehicle as their safety shield, called in backup and ordered the kid to disarm and go to the ground. I think these officers would have reacted this way no matter the color of the gun holder. Since it was a hand gun and waisted I think they thought they could get to him before he got it in a ready position. Each firearm call has different protocols depending on the type of weapon described.

... A COP PULLS UP PUT YOUR HANDS IN THE AIR!

Is that for everyone or just people who know they have committed a crime?

a reply to: raymundoko

The issue, as described in your post, is that the officers approached a child playing a game, and turned it into real life.

Of all parties involved, I expect the child the act the least rationally. So things like playing make believe and tucking an airsoft pistol into his waistband...that is what I would expect a child to do in a park, where children play.

The less rational behavior was the ones who slid into the scene and opened fire. Had the officer not placed himself in that expect physical location, the child would not be dead.

Like I said, i can't say if its criminal or not. I can say, however, that it not making it through the grand jury stinks of cronyism, where the law investigated itself and found no wrong doing.

a reply to: LSU0408

It was in no way justified. It was murder.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Watch the entire video. He was pointing it at people as they walked by for 10ish minutes. He modified the weapon to look real.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

You mean had the officer's partner not placed him in that position? Because I'm pretty positive the passenger doesn't control where the car slides to a stop at.

And to be perfectly frank, if I was sitting passenger side less than ten feet from a guy we had reports of having a gun and had his hands near his waistband, I'm hard pressed to say I wouldn't have bailed out exactly like he did. I like to think I wouldn't have been so quick on the trigger but I think it's a bit obtuse to sit here and act as if you would've just ambled outta the car without a care in the world.

originally posted by: roadgravel
It's unlawful for a police officer to shot an unarmed man in the back. Should he be executed?

Umm actually Its not IF the persons a threat to others around them. Supreme court ruled on it.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: BIGPoJo
For everyone in this thread second guessing the actions of the police officer you need to ask yourself this...

When should you shoot someone that has a gun? Do you wait until you can see directly down the barrel? Do you wait until they fire at you? Do you call your supervisor for permission to engage? Do you wait until that gunman shoots and kills a civilian. When is it OK to proceed with deadly force?

I know the answer, do you?

When they face you.

But if its a child, first assumption is that its a toy, and I don't shoot. It would be among the most remarkable of circumstances that would have me thinking a 12 year old is going to kill me, and reaching for my sidearm. Remarkable enough that I can't really contextualize what that would even look like.

Apparently the "boy" was really big and not small and cute also I dont think they had time to ask his age do you?

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: roadgravel
It's unlawful for a police officer to shot an unarmed man in the back. Should he be executed?

Umm actually Its not IF the persons a threat to others around them. Supreme court ruled on it.

It is if he is not a threat. I guess in today's world, all are a threat no matter the situation. Hurting the officer's ego is a threat to him I suppose.

originally posted by: kimar
How is this possible? A cop drives up to a 12 year old boy with a toy gun and within 2 seconds shoots him dead.

We need to get these coward cops off of our streets and off the public payroll.

It is possible because of the militarization of US police forces with too many members that have never served in the armed forces.

The days of Mayberry are gone forever and won't be coming back.

Sad as it is, that is the way it is now.

Like I said---The solution to all these problems and the only solution is an Extinct Level Event. There is no other way.

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: BIGPoJo
For everyone in this thread second guessing the actions of the police officer you need to ask yourself this...

When should you shoot someone that has a gun? Do you wait until you can see directly down the barrel? Do you wait until they fire at you? Do you call your supervisor for permission to engage? Do you wait until that gunman shoots and kills a civilian. When is it OK to proceed with deadly force?

I know the answer, do you?

When they face you.

But if its a child, first assumption is that its a toy, and I don't shoot. It would be among the most remarkable of circumstances that would have me thinking a 12 year old is going to kill me, and reaching for my sidearm. Remarkable enough that I can't really contextualize what that would even look like.

Apparently the "boy" was really big and not small and cute also I dont think they had time to ask his age do you?

Ah donno about you but this strikes me as being average for a 12yrs old in this day and age and he is imo cute as button
but you are not alone in this type of thinking,
Black Boys Viewed as Older, Less Innocent Than Whites, Research Finds

“Children in most societies are considered to be in a distinct group with characteristics such as innocence and the need for protection. Our research found that black boys can be seen as responsible for their actions at an age when white boys still benefit from the assumption that children are essentially innocent,” said author Phillip Atiba Goff, PhD, of the University of California, Los Angeles. The study was published online in APA’s Journal of Personality and Social Psychology®.
Researchers tested 176 police officers, mostly white males, average age 37, in large urban areas, to determine their levels of two distinct types of bias — prejudice and unconscious dehumanization of black people by comparing them to apes.

To test for prejudice, researchers had officers complete a widely used psychological questionnaire with statements such as “It is likely that blacks will bring violence to neighborhoods when they move in.” To determine officers’ dehumanization of blacks, the researchers gave them a psychological task in which they paired blacks and whites with large cats, such as lions, or with apes. Researchers reviewed police officers’ personnel records to determine use of force while on duty and found that those who dehumanized blacks were more likely to have used force against a black child in custody than officers who did not dehumanize blacks. The study described use of force as takedown or wrist lock; kicking or punching; striking with a blunt object; using a police dog, restraints or hobbling; or using tear gas, electric shock or killing. Only dehumanization and not police officers’ prejudice against blacks — conscious or not — was linked to violent encounters with black children in custody, according to the study.
www.apa.org...

Good cops need to be able to out the cowards and d-bags in their ranks without repercussions. Nobody hates a bad cop worse than a good one. They just dont talk about it because of fear of looking disloyal.

If the man is crying on the gun range, and it's not about shooting his foot, I would question whether he should be carrying a firearm in public as an officer. Did he adopt a shot first and cry later attitude. Too bad the current force didn't ask the previous one about his training and service. Although, I will admit, it may not have mattered.

originally posted by: Spider879

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: BIGPoJo
For everyone in this thread second guessing the actions of the police officer you need to ask yourself this...

When should you shoot someone that has a gun? Do you wait until you can see directly down the barrel? Do you wait until they fire at you? Do you call your supervisor for permission to engage? Do you wait until that gunman shoots and kills a civilian. When is it OK to proceed with deadly force?

I know the answer, do you?

When they face you.

But if its a child, first assumption is that its a toy, and I don't shoot. It would be among the most remarkable of circumstances that would have me thinking a 12 year old is going to kill me, and reaching for my sidearm. Remarkable enough that I can't really contextualize what that would even look like.

Apparently the "boy" was really big and not small and cute also I dont think they had time to ask his age do you?

Ah donno about you but this strikes me as being average for a 12yrs old in this day and age and he is imo cute as button
but you are not alone in this type of thinking,
Black Boys Viewed as Older, Less Innocent Than Whites, Research Finds

“Children in most societies are considered to be in a distinct group with characteristics such as innocence and the need for protection. Our research found that black boys can be seen as responsible for their actions at an age when white boys still benefit from the assumption that children are essentially innocent,” said author Phillip Atiba Goff, PhD, of the University of California, Los Angeles. The study was published online in APA’s Journal of Personality and Social Psychology®.
Researchers tested 176 police officers, mostly white males, average age 37, in large urban areas, to determine their levels of two distinct types of bias — prejudice and unconscious dehumanization of black people by comparing them to apes.

To test for prejudice, researchers had officers complete a widely used psychological questionnaire with statements such as “It is likely that blacks will bring violence to neighborhoods when they move in.” To determine officers’ dehumanization of blacks, the researchers gave them a psychological task in which they paired blacks and whites with large cats, such as lions, or with apes. Researchers reviewed police officers’ personnel records to determine use of force while on duty and found that those who dehumanized blacks were more likely to have used force against a black child in custody than officers who did not dehumanize blacks. The study described use of force as takedown or wrist lock; kicking or punching; striking with a blunt object; using a police dog, restraints or hobbling; or using tear gas, electric shock or killing. Only dehumanization and not police officers’ prejudice against blacks — conscious or not — was linked to violent encounters with black children in custody, according to the study.
www.apa.org...

IS that the same boy who was close to 200 lbs that was shot? Obviously he wasnt a typical sized 12 yr old. And Oh noes a study...(most likely outcome decided before conducted and im guessing done by someone with a agenda)
Point is the cops cannot scan a weapon like robocop can alright? Obviously th e boy thought it wa s a good idea to do something stupid and wound up dead. Im sure his parents will have another one after cashing in on this one. Also Did th e parents have insurance on him? Could be a way to cash in and get rid of a mouth to feed.(crazy? yeah. has it been done before? YES) His parents should be held liable for not teaching their son to not point guns of any type at Police.